Revisiting Go

Loons · #1

I want to play go a lot again recently. For me, this means I mostly want to ~~theorycraft~~ exhaustively optimize my expenditure of go time.

My current equipment :
- I have a bunch of old go books though I notably never got Yamashita Keigo's or Lee Sedol's book(s).
- 2011? GoGoD + kombilo
- Dailyjoseki
- gokifu internet resource
- Breakfast says I'm welcome back for lessons

Planning broad plan :

I want to figure out an ideal way for me to study. I occasionally have brilliant feeling and often quite derivative ideas.

I would like to create systems for pursuing some of my ideas, and then examine their relation to my progress.

Some ideas :

Study a single pro with a large game count (in my database). My idea was that "learning from" a single player might be more productive than trying to learn the whole lot of disparate player's approaches.
- "Train myself" by learning their earlier games and see how accurately I can predict their moves in an ensuing period of their games. As a way of learning "direction".

Study "broad paths" in my database. Kind of the opposite of the previous idea, and essentially available at daily joseki I think.
- For a random board, analyze viable continuations. Compare with database. Somewhat limited to earlier in the game (where many games are available) compared to the last idea.

Write a MC computer program that's stronger than me and use it to play assisted go, or assist the computer in playing go.
- In my second year compsci heart of hearts, this sounds like a good idea. I guess the "learning" would be from having constant access to a "stronger player"'s judgement while playing against uphill players. And having a strong sparring partner (if the computer was stronger than me on its own).

Assume that the authors of go books weren't just cashing in on their fame, study books and relate my played games to the books.
- Conventional. Somehow my attention span always wanes.

Reading: I want to really relate reading to specifically reading the right things (what I'm calling direction). In above "guess the move" ideas, "the move" must be a purposeful sequence not just a general region. Possibly get another tesuji book (just Get Strong at Tesuji in dead tree form).

Marcus · #2

Welcome back to the game! I hear Shaddy wants some more equal sparring partners, and you're a bit closer than I am at the moment.

Good luck with your studies!

judicata · #3

I've been trying to get back "into it" as well. Not that I ever stopped, but just haven't been playing or studying as much. Two pros gave me similar advice: play a bunch of games. I admit that, having slowed down a bit, I'm reluctant to play. Their advice was to force myself to get over it, and I think it makes sense.

Of course, the luxury of being a hobbyist is that we can play (or not) and study (or not) how we want. So whatever gives you the most enjoyment of the game, go for it. Just thought I'd share some advice that resonated with me recently.

Loons · #4

Shaddy always seemed so beatable in a literally unobtainable way. How are you and your go, Marcus? Also judicata, whom I'm a little less well acquainted with?

I enjoy ~~feeling like my time was well spent~~ tautologies.

One concern I have about just "playing more games" (and reviewing) is that abundant opponents are typically equal ; and the winning and losing seems defined by two players cluelessly fumbling the ball back and forth (which of course I enjoy greatly). I want a learning resource that is both accessible and to a high standard "just good" ; though the measure of that does need to be playing rank, so.

Marcus · #5

I'm sliding around the 2-3k mark on KGS ... not bad for an 18 month break with only a handful of DGS games going haphazardly.

Currently, I feel like a good breakthrough in my go ability is just around the corner, but I can't quite grasp it yet. It's exciting!

On the other side of things, I remember nothing and play on instinct right now, which is a very exciting (*ahem* clumsy) way to play go. I think perhaps I have a better feel for attacking than I did before, but my laziness in reading and counting is still my prime bad habit.

That being said, I do read more often now (though I still haven't been able to remind myself to count DURING the game).

Yeah, that's my go right now.

Loons · #6

A 'good' starting place didn't really occur to me for "studying a single pro across a large range of games in chronological order".

As judicata said, enjoying your hobby is important so I exercised my enormous bias and picked Yamashita Keigo.

Specifically his games as black starting from 2000 to c. 100 moves because I wanted to avoid tedious endgames / late midgames.

Before the last branch it seems he was promoted from 6d to 9d ; I didn't include his opponents or the results but it was kind of a "Keigo beats up the best of Japan late 80s to early 90s".

Mixing them into one SGF somewhat groups openings at the sacrifice of chronological order (except that later introduced openings will tend to be further down) and allows for some degeneracy. (Not very ideal).

Loons · #7

The natural corrollary of yesterday's SGF.

He played Nirensei 3/5 games, and denied cross fuseki 4/5 games (and played white tengen madness one game).

He makes bold central moves, but plays territorially when his opponents try to resist. This reminds me of something I think breakfast said, "preferring territory is a professional trait".

Another thing is the seeming modularity of professional play (prior to endgame). I guess this is because each player is reading specific results and resistances when they make a play, rather than "just seeing what turns up".

The games seem to reach endgame far sooner than his games as black. The games have more recognisably popular fuseki (reflecting black's discretion).

***

So far I am very happy with this study idea, though I have just begun.

I intend to adopt Yamashita's opening style and specifically ape him so far as possible.

After my exams finish I will pick up his book, which IIRC GoGameGuru sells. Having the commented games and moves will be an interesting contrast to nakedly studying the moves.

My logic for being able to study games without commentary is that any move can be considered good ; it seemed reasonable to a professional at one point : Their mistakes will be subtle and mostly non-issues for games at my level, and for many ranks to come.

Loons · #8

Loons wrote:

Study a single pro with a large game count (in my database). My idea was that "learning from" a single player might be more productive than trying to learn the whole lot of disparate player's approaches.
- "Train myself" by learning their earlier games and see how accurately I can predict their moves in an ensuing period of their games. As a way of learning "direction".

I feel like my hunch here was a good one. In Yamashita's black games he plays those 5th line enclosure openings with a similar kind of feeling. With white I guess it's a bit more subtle.

-

I wonder how a study of games grouped by fuseki / joseki choice would compare.
The volume of games would, for popular choices be much larger, however different players' idiosyncracies might clash, which is what I am trying to avoid.

One advantage of my single-player is that you see that player dealing with "the wild" of that particular epoch, whereas if you grouped games by a fuseki a different opening choice would throw you into a world of novelty.

One could argue though that by restricting the joseki/fuseki of games you study, your goal is to isolate and focus on decision-making (and thus "what is good") for export into your own games rather than just be trying to ape that joseki/fuseki (just a bonus when it is relevant).

Eg. in my game with emerus, I am/was trying to apply what I have learned about/from avalanche games to a non-avalanche game.

Loons · #9

This is the same "Yamashita Black" SGF with five more games added, so you need to know your way around to find new games. You can see the consistency of his opening, and how he varied his opening pattern (5-3 instead of 5-4) at :b3:

when the chance to repeat himself came up.

It's surprising how he can fabricate these gigantic frameworks. I wonder if he can be thought of as a 21st century extension of Kubomatsu Katsukiyo.

In other news oren has offered to go over his collection of Yamashita game commentary with me in the L19 room on KGS some time which is a fantastic opportunity, (though I really should concentrate on exams for the next week).

Edit: Note to self, check to see if Yamashita's opening choices reflected the game history of his opponents (other than his sanrensei against Takemiya).

Loons · **#10**

Another 5 white games ; now very diverse.

He played his first game with an orthogonal white hoshi opening (nirensei), though that's still 1/10, equal to the number of games he decided to go for white tengen.

With my next 5 games, I will try to typify Yamashita's opening decisions ; and when I finish exams I will start trying them on KGS.

Loons · **#11**

Strategic Take So Far As Black :

I feel that a lot of play boils down to doing or resisting the following.

These are the fundamental 5-5 joseki :

The major factor in influence games is that both of these are gote :
- Setting up a valuable direction
- Occupying a valuable direction

Black's play has three steps
1. Set up a valuable direction which white will occupy.
2. Play sente against white's new group to create a new valuable direction.
3. Occupy that new direction.

The dichotomy :
- Black is trying to make something big at the cost of feeding white early territory.
- White may resist and offer black a lot of territory instead.
- Often it will be right to accept white's offer and take the big territory.

paK0 · **#12**

Loons wrote:

Another 5 white games ; now very diverse.

He played his first game with an orthogonal white hoshi opening (nirensei), though that's still 1/15, equal to the number of games he decided to go for white tengen.

With my next 5 games, I will try to typify Yamashita's opening decisions ; and when I finish exams I will start trying them on KGS.

Since you seem to follow this pro to some extend do you know weather he watched Hikaru no go? The 3rd game is identical to one in the series, at least until move 15.

oren · **#13**

paK0 wrote:

Since you seem to follow this pro to some extend do you know weather he watched Hikaru no go? The 3rd game is identical to one in the series, at least until move 15.

http://senseis.xmp.net/?HikaruNoGo%2FGames

4 of Yamashita's games were taken to be used in Hikaru no Go. It's not that he watched Hikaru no Go but Hikaru no Go watched him.

paK0 · **#14**

oren wrote:

paK0 wrote:

Since you seem to follow this pro to some extend do you know weather he watched Hikaru no go? The 3rd game is identical to one in the series, at least until move 15.

http://senseis.xmp.net/?HikaruNoGo%2FGames

4 of Yamashita's games were taken to be used in Hikaru no Go. It's not that he watched Hikaru no Go but Hikaru no Go watched him.

Ah, yes, thinking about it this makes more sense =)

Loons · **#15**

Yamashita's white seems deliberately unpredictable.

4/15 games were nirensei, 4/15 were centre/influence strategies characterized by 5-4/6-4 and tengen. The rest were a mixed bag of 3-4s and more 4-4s. Only in 2/15 games has :w2:

been repeated.

His strategy is typically high and fighting despite common exceptions. He has not allowed minichinese, playing the normal counterapproach resistance instead. A recurring joseki occurs when he plays tenuki from a 4-4 approach (eg to deny minichinese).

Loons · **#16**

Exams being finished, I had time for a game! Specifically in my newly acquired (personal interpretation of) "Yamashita Style".

Playing and fighting like this was terrifying/exhilarating. As I was anticipating, my usual territorial moves felt irrelevant (self-fulfilling?). I seem to have lucked out in the fighting. Much of this game felt quite out of my hands (though perhaps that was true of my opponent as well).

I would love people's insights and comments. Oh, I'm black.

Loons · **#17**

My review.

Loons · **#18**

My review (still would like others' comments).

I think this influence -> fighting style inasmuchas I'm getting it almost necessarily creates difficult fighting (well, if the opponent decides to "take too much" and fight).

The fighting is hard and fuseki is more precipitous than more conventional, well-trodden paths. However, hard fighting is not an advantage for the opponent either and I think these two, anyway, have felt off-balanced and fumbled times they could have won.

paK0 · **#19**

I don't really have anything constructive to say, but keep it up, those games are really entertaining.

I do feel sorry for your opponents though, that seems really annoying to play against :lol:

Shaddy · **#20**

@86 I think G14 could kill.

Revisiting Go

Who is online